Opt-In For Boobies

[Brett]

http://www.guardian....rvice-providers

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, a Christian charity. At the government's request the group's chief executive, Reg Bailey, led a review in tandem with Department of Education staff into the commercialisation and sexualisation of children. The Bailey report earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

Hugely irresponsible to just sit back and say "We can't be bothered to educate ourselves, lets pester the state to fulfill our parental responsibilities for us"

Surely if you are concerened about your children looking at sexually explicit material on the internet then you should either educate yourself on measures to prevent this or monitor the time that your children spend online?

Isn't this simply the beginning of internet censorship? today "adult", tomorrow "provoking", then "thought provoking"? And at what part do they draw the line, are they going to block access to sites that contain the word sex?

Its not the states responsibility to censor the internet for parents who aren't responsible enough to supervise their childrens use of the internet. The parents should get off their arses and educate themselves about... (sure there are courses that they could do in the local community).

Essentially relying on the state to police what children are accessing is lazy and should not be promoted by the government, they should be taking more measures to educate parents into finding out what is out there as I bet there are LOT of people who aren't even aware of what is available. They can then make a decision themselves as to what they feel their children should be allowed to access.

This, all coming from a group of mothers who probably sit and read Hello, OK! or whatever other overpriced magazine to stare at the sexualisation of women in the media and who let their 13 year old daughters go out in those stupid shorts that seem to be the craze.

tl;dr: Censorship on the internet is being introduced in the form of porn filtering by ISP's. Discuss?

[Malcolm Robinson]

It’s already here in reality, try posting stuff on certain sites which can be construed as critical of the owner or sponsor………….

Don’t really mind the porn filter can we have the same with pop ups!

[Brett]

It's not the content that I am opposed to but the fact that censorship is taking place in our own country.

Another article that I have come across which also makes some valid points linking to other articles.

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/10/12/camerons-barking-plan-to-restrict-porn-would-entrap-people/

Here is another aspect to all of this. The proposals, and others to curb “excessive sexuality” were the product of the Christian advocacy group Mother’s Union. The group describes itself on their website as;

…an international Christian charity… [that works to] bring about a world where God’s love is shown through loving, respectful and flourishing relationships.

This is a religious lobbying group directly influencing political policy. This does not end well.

Getting porn blocked is an easy victory for a Christian lobbying group.

You can argue this is worth fighting for as an issue of free speech, or privacy, but really this is about giving ground to religious lobbyists who might start trying their luck with something bigger.

Is this David Cameron admitting that a diverse Britain is not the way forward and what is preventing muslim/jewish/islamic lobbyists approaching the government with something that they don't agree with?

There should be something done about this and it is scandalous that it is even being considered!!